The graph below shows the consumption of fish and some different kinds of meat in a European country between 1979 and 2004
Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main features, and make comparisons where relevant.
The line graph compares how many grams of fish and other forms of meat were consumed in a European country from 1979 to 2004.
Overall, there was a decrease in the consumption of Beef, Lamb, and Fish with Beef witnessing the most dramatic decline, while the figure for Chicken saw a moderate rise during the period. In addition, Fish consistently had the lowest figure among the years examined.
About 200 grams of Beef was consumed per week in 1979, with a subsequent fluctuation, and a final drop from nearly 250 grams in the 1980s to just over 100 grams in 2004. The figure for Chicken saw an opposite trend., It started at just under 150 grams in 1979, after which it experienced a gradual rise to reach a peak of approximately 250 grams, before ending the period at about 247 grams.
The consumption of Lamb was 150 grams in 1979, followed by a marginal decline to just over 50 grams in 2004. A similar trend was seen in the figure of fish, it hovered around 50 grams and a final decline to under 50 grams.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2024-05-05 | Ahmad_off | 78 | view |
| 2024-05-05 | Ahmad_off | 78 | view |
| 2023-05-29 | baoquyen1906 | 56 | view |
| 2023-05-27 | baoquyen1906 | 73 | view |
| 2023-05-27 | baoquyen1906 | 73 | view |
- The graph below shows the average carbon dioxide CO2 emissions per person in the United Kingdom Sweden Italy and Portugal between 1967 and 2007 67
- The chart shows the results of surveys in one African country asking teenagers the main reasons for using their phones between 2016 and 2019 Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main features and make comparisons where relevant 84
- Urban areas are witnessing an increase in obesity among children What are reasons Suggest some solutions 73
- The line graphs of five different communication services worldwide 61
- The graph below gives information from a 2008 report about consumption of energy in the USA since 1980 with projections until 2030 73
Transition Words or Phrases used:
while, in addition
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 5.0 7.0 71% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 0.0 1.00243902439 0% => OK
Conjunction : 4.0 6.8 59% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 1.0 3.15609756098 32% => OK
Pronoun: 3.0 5.60731707317 54% => OK
Preposition: 41.0 33.7804878049 121% => OK
Nominalization: 4.0 3.97073170732 101% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 838.0 965.302439024 87% => OK
No of words: 185.0 196.424390244 94% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.52972972973 4.92477711251 92% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.68801715136 3.73543355544 99% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.40928323922 2.65546596893 91% => OK
Unique words: 100.0 106.607317073 94% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.540540540541 0.547539520022 99% => OK
syllable_count: 240.3 283.868780488 85% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.3 1.45097560976 90% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 2.0 1.53170731707 131% => OK
Article: 4.0 4.33902439024 92% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 1.07073170732 280% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 2.0 0.482926829268 414% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 5.0 3.36585365854 149% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 7.0 8.94146341463 78% => Need more sentences. Double check the format of sentences, make sure there is a space between two sentences, or have enough periods. And also check the lengths of sentences, maybe they are too long.
Sentence length: 26.0 22.4926829268 116% => OK
Sentence length SD: 46.9937034428 43.030603864 109% => OK
Chars per sentence: 119.714285714 112.824112599 106% => OK
Words per sentence: 26.4285714286 22.9334400587 115% => OK
Discourse Markers: 2.57142857143 5.23603664747 49% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 4.0 3.83414634146 104% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 1.69756097561 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 1.0 3.70975609756 27% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 2.0 1.13902439024 176% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 4.09268292683 98% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.114900956085 0.215688989381 53% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0655570324377 0.103423049105 63% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0630575383668 0.0843802449381 75% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0920732009376 0.15604864568 59% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0702905955175 0.0819641961636 86% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.1 13.2329268293 99% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 70.47 61.2550243902 115% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 6.51609756098 48% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.9 10.3012195122 96% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 9.29 11.4140731707 81% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.57 8.06136585366 94% => OK
difficult_words: 31.0 40.7170731707 76% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 13.0 11.4329268293 114% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.4 10.9970731707 113% => OK
text_standard: 13.0 11.0658536585 117% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 73.0337078652 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 6.5 Out of 9
---------------------
Note: the e-grader does NOT examine the meaning of words and ideas. VIP users will receive further evaluations by advanced module of e-grader and human graders.